This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-11-05
Channels
- # announcements (1)
- # babashka (7)
- # beginners (60)
- # biff (7)
- # cider (2)
- # clj-kondo (1)
- # clojure (15)
- # clojure-france (1)
- # clojure-norway (1)
- # clojurescript (7)
- # datascript (7)
- # emacs (4)
- # etaoin (1)
- # honeysql (7)
- # interceptors (8)
- # introduce-yourself (3)
- # kaocha (1)
- # off-topic (16)
- # pathom (2)
- # reagent (15)
- # reitit (11)
- # releases (1)
- # slack-help (3)
- # vim (36)
Is there some dialect available for H2 database when building HoneySQL statements? I'm asking because I currently have to employ a workaround when referencing tables in DDLs.
e.g. [[:constraint :some-constraint] [:references :table/column]] will produce CONSTRAINT some_constraint REFERENCES table.column, but H2 requires the reference to be schema.table(column), even if you are in the same schema as the table you're referencing, leading me to using workarounds like [[:constraint :some-constraint] [:references [:public.table :column]]]
I'm not sure why you consider that to be a workaround?
hm... I guess I consider it a workaround because HoneySQL documentation seems to suggest :table/column is the "natural" way to reference table.column , rather than doing what I am currently doing. As long as this seems OK in your eyes then I'm willing to accept it 🙂
If you need to specify the schema where would HoneySQL get that from, unless you tell it somehow? [:schema.table :column] seems like a good notation for that.
(and, as I keep saying over and over, DDL is so horribly DB-specific and non-regular that supporting it "fully" is... a pipe dream at best)
Makes sense. Thanks for the quick response btw. I was just making sure I'm using HoneySQL as intended, and I'm fine with things as they currently are
"as intended" implies HoneySQL is opinionated 🙂 I think, when it comes to DDL, whatever works is acceptable.